Full Breakdown
Election Chief’s Roll Revision Triggers Institutional Rift and Political Outcry
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event: Special Intensive Revision and Internal Dispute
India’s Election Commission is conducting the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, removing more than 130 million names—about 13 % of the electorate—from draft lists in 30 states and territories. The commission says the drive purges duplicate and ineligible entries while preserving legitimate voters.
Two senior commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, lodged at least 14 formal objections over ten months, alleging that decisions on voter additions, deletions and database access were taken without their knowledge. Their objections raise questions about whether the three-member commission is acting collectively or if chief commissioner Gyanesh Kumar is exercising unilateral authority.
Background & Context
Kumar, a former IAS officer, retired in January 2024 and was appointed election commissioner two months later. He became Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) in February 2025, the first CEC selected under a 2023 amendment that replaced the Chief Justice of India on the selection panel with a cabinet minister nominated by the prime minister. Opposition parties argue the amendment weakens the commission’s independence.
The SIR, launched in Bihar in 2025 and later expanded nationwide, is presented as a clean-up ahead of upcoming elections. Critics contend the timing and scale could affect the political balance, especially where the ruling BJP seeks to consolidate power.
Official Statements & Responses
The Election Commission maintains that the SIR is a lawful effort to ensure clean voter lists and that its decisions were unanimous. Kumar has defended the SIR, challenging Rahul Gandhi to substantiate “vote theft” allegations in a sworn affidavit.
Andhra Pradesh chief minister Naidu praised the commission’s clarification, saying it reaffirmed institutional integrity. The BJP and the commission deny claims of partisan manipulation.
The Supreme Court will examine whether SIR-related decisions complied with the statutory framework governing the Election Commission.
Criticism & Opposition
Opposition parties are preparing a motion to remove Kumar.
Congress spokesperson Khera alleged that SIR decisions were taken without the knowledge of two commissioners, questioning legality. Gandhi, a member of the panel that approved Kumar’s appointment, opposed the appointment and asked for its deferment pending Supreme Court review.
Critics, including the Constitutional Conduct Group, argue the SIR burdens voters, risks disenfranchising Dalits, backward communities, minorities and young voters, and could undermine universal adult suffrage.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
*Countercurrents* alleges the commission made “unauthorised and illegal” changes to Form 6 and that the Supreme Court’s approval of the SIR does not extend to such amendments. The Election Commission asserts all SIR decisions were approved unanimously and complied with legal requirements. The discrepancy highlights a gap in independent verification of the Form 6 modifications.
What’s Next
The Supreme Court will hear the petition challenging the SIR and Kumar’s functioning in the coming week, potentially setting precedents for the commission’s authority. Parliamentary motions to remove the chief commissioner remain under consideration, while the Cockroach Janta Party plans protests beginning on Oct 2, despite police restrictions. The outcome will determine whether the SIR proceeds, is altered, or is halted, and will shape public confidence in India’s electoral institution.